whereas Applicants No.2 to 5 stood as guarantors and the Applicant No. I created mortgage against the schedule properties. In view of the default committed by the Applicants, the loan account was classified as NPA on 31.03.2017 as per the guidelines of RBI. Thereafter, the Respondent issued Demand notice dt.2o.O4.2Ol7 and the said notice has been duly sent to the Applicants and others. When the Applicants failed to pay the outstanding dues as demanded, the Respondent issued possession notice dt.O2.O8,2Ol7 in respect of schedule property No.1 by duly following Rule 8(1)(2) of Rules, 2002. Thereafter, the Respondent issued Pre-Sale Notice dt.22.O2.2017 and Sale notice dt.22.02.2018 for conducting auction of the schedule property-l on 10.05.2018, however, the said auction was not materialized for want of bidders. The bank issued Possession notice dt.l7 .lO.2Ol9 in respect of Schedule Property No.2 and sent the said notice to the Applicants and others through Regd.post and duly followed Rule 8(1)(2) of Rules, 2OO2. The Respondent issued Sale notice dt.31.08.2019 in respect of schedule property-ll and challenging the said notice, the Applicant No. 1 filed SA 303/ 19 before this Hon,ble Tribunal and the said SA was dismissed by this Tribunal on merits vide order dt.06.03.2023. Thereafter, the bank issued presale notice dt. 1g.O l.2O2S and e Auction sale Notice dt.2o.o2.2o2s for fixing auction of the schedule property-ll on 27.O3.2O25 and sent the said notices to the Applicants by Regd. post and the said notices were published in two leading newspapers. Thus the Respondent has duly foliowed the procedure and there are no violations. Accordingly, Ld. counsel prayed to dismiss the SA.
